Batman: The Dark Knight

  • Thread starter Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 164 comments
  • 10,010 views
What can I say about this movie that hasn't already been said elsewhere? The entire film is just breathtaking on every level, from the acting and character development to the stunts and special effects. It... it just blows everything away.

I think the TRS guys said it best, from the moment you step in, you're thrown into the action and it doesn't stop until the credits roll. I was quite literally on the edge of my seat for at least half of the movie, and quite literally, there are moments in which you need to remind yourself to breathe. The pacing is amazing, despite the fact that the movie is just a shade too long.

I'm told that the IMAX version is amazing, and that if you have one nearby, to attempt to see it. I was in a DLP screening, but I do plan to catch an IMAX show later on. Either way, do yourself a favor and go see it.

Oh, and one more thing...

...This blew Iron Man out of the water.
 
I saw the 12:45AM showing at the Mall of Georgia last night. I ordered 4 IMAX tickets from Fandango.com to make sure I got some seats. Turns out the IMAX was starting their showing a 12:00AM, so I had to settle for a regular screen. So, I drove over and hour to see The Dark Night.

At 12:00 the theater was already jam packed. People had on capes and batman masks. It was a fun place to be. People clapped and oooed and awwwed at every twist and turn. It was quite the experience. Got home at 5AM. :)

Anyhoo, it rawked. Just like everyone said. I love the pencil trick. And the hospital bit...
 
I am not reading any of the replies to avoid spoilers. We are going to see this right after work tonight at the local Plaza 1 & 2 that shows the movie for only $2.50.
 
Reventón;3091760
What tracks do you regard to as the best of the album besides Aggressive Expansion? That was the first song I've heard, and I love it. 👍
Click to expand...

Introduce A Little Anarchy is a good one. It and Aggressive Expansion are the two pieces that showcase the horn motif the best.
 
Saw The Dark Knight just a bit ago today and have to say the movie was spectacular. The acting was great. The sounds were wonderful. The action was good. Everything was just awesome! Great review huh? :lol:
 
This movie was just amazing. I loved every actor in it. Maggie was alright, not a huge part of the movie anyway. I only cringed when the Joker threw her off Wayne's loft and she let out that oh-so-manufactured yelp.

I absolutely loved how the Joker felt like such a real character it was scary. He's probably the most realistic characters in the film. I understand not casting the Joker anymore, but i would also feel really sad if they didn't because now the Joker feels so involved in Batman's struggles with his own morality. I really wanna see more of a similar Joker character. I don't want to feel as if Ledger's performance can't be repeated or surpassed, simply because he died after filming.

Eckhart gave an awesome performance where i, once again, believed he was a real character and really wanted him to clean up Gotham even though i knew he would become a villain soon enough. But then when he did, his character was so actually two-faced that i kind of felt bad that he had lost his mind.

There were some bits i felt were kind of poorly done, though.
Even though i liked it, the Two-Face character felt entirely rushed. Maybe i'm just not used to characters being in only one movie, or kind of wanted him to go on fighting Batman, but it felt weird killing him off at the end. There was also the fact that, while he was "still" Harvey Dent, he didn't really seem to care much about Rachel. We don't even get to see him propose, and instead, the characters refer to it after the fact. So their whole relationship felt hollow, which made it all the stranger when Two-Face became hellbent on revenge after her death. It was particularly funny when the Joker was talking him in the hospital (probably best part of the movie with Joker in it, BTW; the nurse outfit and bomb trigger scene are classic. :lol:) and about Rachel. The Joker was referring to Harvey's "girl" and Two-Face just yelps out "RACHAAL!!" I lol'd at that one. Dent's transformation from "The White Knight" to Two-Face was really abrupt.

I also feel like the Joker was a little bit too all-knowing and ingenious. He seemed to know what would happen every time every where, except for the scene where he's trying to get the people to blow up the ferry that's opposite them. It didn't feel fair that the Joker showed zero weakness. I understood that he was supposed to be the polar opposite of Batman while still being the same person, but Batman has his strengths and weaknesses. The Joker is just a crazy son of bitch. As i said before though, I loved how real he was.

Edit: Oh and another point - is Aaron Eckhart's character dead, or is it just "Harvey Dent" who's dead and Two-Face is actually in prison with the Joker? The movie didn't make that 100% clear. Batman survived the fall at the end, but Dent did not? I don't know if Batman's armor would really protect him from a fall. Seems a little far fetched.

So, tl;dr - see this movie!!

Edit: BTW, did anyone stay after the credits? Anything happen?
 
Giancarlo
Edit: BTW, did anyone stay after the credits? Anything happen?
Click to expand...

There was a little thing for Ledger, but otherwise nothing. I think Iron Man has ruined the credits for me...
 
I thought the movie was fantastic, and the Joker was absolutely insane. I loved how he felt no fear in anything.
The only thing I didn't really care for though, was the repetitive 50/50 situations. Every fight, every situation seemed like it was always "Choose this or that". That got kind of annoying and I just wanted to see for once Batman fight someone for maybe more than 2 minutes, a fight just between him & the Joker, not "Who do I save/choose"?

That was the only negative I had for the film, but Ledger made it. The way he played his character was just amazing. 👍
 
My Review:

Non Spoiler Version

Good, but not better than Batman Begins. I was so looking forward to seeing this movie, and it delivered on many levels. Ledger was great, the action was well done, acting was solid, plot was decent, character development was... lopsided.

This movie focuses a lot on the joker (you know that already). But it does so at the risk of ignoring other important character developments going on with Wayne, Dawes, Gordon, Fox, and at least one other very important new character who is introduced. They did a great job with the joker... but maybe a little less on him would have made the movie more balanced.

The Specifics

Dent's character really did feel rushed. He switched from idealist to chance in one conversation with the joker. Also, he had an opportunity to kill the man who killed his girl and he didn't take it. I understood why batman didn't take his opportunities, but not Dent. Dent should have shot him. Instead of shooting the joker, he decides to shoot an innocent child to get back at Gordon, who tried to save Rachel. That made no sense to me whatsoever.

Batman's reasons for not killing the joker needed to be better explained - though I get it.

Batman's reasons for being willing to turn himself in needed to be better explained - though I get it.

The reason to blame Dent's killings on batman makes no sense to me whatsoever. Why do we have a binary choice here? Why not blame the joker, or leave the deaths unexplained? I see why you wouldn't want to blame it on Dent, but blaming batman doesn't make sense.

Dawes's reasoning for choosing Dent over Wayne make sense to me. But they needed to be more fleshed out. If they had done so, I might have actually cared when she died.

Good movie overall. Lots of things done very well, but I feel like they could have paid more attention to characters not named "joker".
 
Danoff
The Specifics

Dent's character really did feel rushed. He switched from idealist to chance in one conversation with the joker. Also, he had an opportunity to kill the man who killed his girl and he didn't take it. I understood why batman didn't take his opportunities, but not Dent. Dent should have shot him. Instead of shooting the joker, he decides to shoot an innocent child to get back at Gordon, who tried to save Rachel. That made no sense to me whatsoever.

Batman's reasons for not killing the joker needed to be better explained - though I get it.

Batman's reasons for being willing to turn himself in needed to be better explained - though I get it.

The reason to blame Dent's killings on batman makes no sense to me whatsoever. Why do we have a binary choice here? Why not blame the joker, or leave the deaths unexplained? I see why you wouldn't want to blame it on Dent, but blaming batman doesn't make sense.

Dawes's reasoning for choosing Dent over Wayne make sense to me. But they needed to be more fleshed out. If they had done so, I might have actually cared when she died.
Click to expand...

I too felt it was strange that Dent would change his stance on crime and whatnot so quickly, but if you really think about him, it's not too surprising. Take the scene where he was forcefully interrogating one of Joker's men, for example. Even though he wasn't going to kill him anyway, because his coin had two heads (this was before his injury), he still seemed really intent on scaring the crap out of this kid. And he didn't kill the Joker because the Joker convinced him that he had nothing to do with Rachel's death. Or maybe not, i'm not sure, because i do remember Dent saying that if Joker's men did the crime, the Joker might as well be responsible. But maybe Dent realized that the Joker would not have come about in the first place if not for Batman forcing the city to change it's thinking and therefore force all the city's mob bosses to hire the Joker. But i agree that the whole thing wasn't clear.

Remember that Two-Face's ideals all lie on "balance" as justice. So in his mind, killing Gordon's son was balance for Gordon's inability to save Rachel. And he left it to the flip of a coin whether he would shoot the boy or not, which would mean that "fate" was determining the boy's life instead of his own conscious.

I think they couldn't blame the deaths on the Joker because he was already in jail. Or am i getting the film's order mixed up? Was the Joker ferry scene after the Dent scene? I'm sure Batman also felt guilt for essentially turning the Joker loose. He's a hero, so he chose to take the fall and make sure Harvey Dent's image wasn't tarnished. That way the city can remember Dent as a hero.

Yeah i didn't care that she died either. I don't think they did well there.
 
Giancarlo
Take the scene where he was forcefully interrogating one of Joker's men, for example. Even though he wasn't going to kill him anyway, because his coin had two heads (this was before his injury), he still seemed really intent on scaring the crap out of this kid.
Click to expand...

I liked that scene too, though I felt that it was the bare minimum as far as character development went.

Giancarlo
And he didn't kill the Joker because the Joker convinced him that he had nothing to do with Rachel's death.
Click to expand...

Not quite. He says later that the joker was just a "dog" unleashed by others. He basically was turning batman's own reasoning against him from the earlier scene. Batman was saying that the kid Dent was interrogating was basically a mental patient and what was killing or beating him going to do but torture someone who's lost his mind. Dent was flipping that back around on Batman later, and so instead of just killing the joker, he left it to chance. Which works, in a way, but it seemed like someone so motivated by Rachel's death should have wanted to "go again" until it came up tails.


Giancarlo
I think they couldn't blame the deaths on the Joker because he was already in jail.
Click to expand...

Yes, he was back in custody by the time Dent had taken Gordon's family hostage. Dent's murders occurred while he was out of custody. Even if he was in jail, they could have blamed it on Joker's thugs who were killing each other on a regular basis anyway
 
I think the reason why they were blaming Batman for the deaths caused by Dent tied directly to what he had said close to the start of the film, the whole part about remaining a hero long enough to become the villain. Batman, I believe, took this burden as a personal sacrifice not just to hide Dent's actions to keep his memory as the "White Knight" strong, but also to make his own image a bit more dark, to show Batman as something more dangerous, willing to bring down justice at any cost. The main problem is that most of the villains know that he won't kill, or for that matter, cannot kill, because of his own personal convictions.

We'll see where this leads in the third movie.
 
Speaking of a third movie....
Everyone assumes Dent's dead, but was there anything in the comic books that said or could explain Dent's re-appearance? With that said, I personally can't see him coming back. I'm not sure what else he could do in a third film that would surprise me. He pretty much showed how evil he was in this film.

Maybe I need to read the comic books, though. But, if a third film is produced, let me say that I would love to see a villain from a previous movie return, a villain like Poison Ivy or Catwoman. Any one of them so that their characters can actually have redemption as an evil character.
 
There will be a third film, all of the major actors (Bale, Freeman, Caine) signed on... The question now is if Nolan will direct. My guess is that he will, I can't imagine Warner Brothers not shoveling money at him.

That being said, the rumors that are flying now say that we'll see The Riddler be the baddie in the last of the trilogy. My thoughts are somewhat similar to yours, however, that the Catwoman has to appear sometime. It seems most-logical with Rachel dead now.

That being said, I really can't guesstimate for certain. As always, I'm sure we'll know more after Comic Con this weekend.
 
Reventón;3095290
Speaking of a third movie....
Everyone assumes Dent's dead, but was there anything in the comic books that said or could explain Dent's re-appearance? With that said, I personally can't see him coming back. I'm not sure what else he could do in a third film that would surprise me. He pretty much showed how evil he was in this film.

Maybe I need to read the comic books, though. But, if a third film is produced, let me say that I would love to see a villain from a previous movie return, a villain like Poison Ivy or Catwoman. Any one of them so that their characters can actually have redemption as an evil character.
Click to expand...
I have it on good information that Dent is confirmed as being dead.
 
I didnt want to watch this movie as I wanted to go against the hype, but a friend called and asked me to go with him to see it so I went

Turned about to be one of the best movies of the summer up there with Speed Racer

**** out of 4 stars from me

Here is a review

The story was really tense and kept you on the edge of your seat but looking back at it the story was very unrealistic and really impossible. I mean come on, the Joker and a bunch of street thugs are capable of and organized enough to rig hospitals, boats, cars etc with explosives? But in the end this is a movie and what the Joker did is no more realistic then Batman's heroics so I can accept it as part of movie fiction.

Heath Ledger did a good job with the Joker, I watched Jack Nicholson's Joker again the other day and I think the real difference is the script for the Joker was much better in the Dark Knight, most likely because 1989's 'Batman' was more focused on Batman and not the Joker like Dark Knight. In Batman Returns the Villains are more fleshed out like they are in 'The Dark Knight' because batman got his character development in the first movie like Christain Bale's Batman in Batman Begins.

One thing I dont get is why killing the Joker became such an evil thing to do in the movie. Lets face it, the Joker killed many people and tried to kill hundreds more in the movie. Then suddenly letting him die is a bad thing and you are evil like the joker if you kill him after all the people he killed himself?

Michael Keaton's Batman tried to kill the Joker every chance he got until he succeeded at the end. The guy is a serial killer and would get the death penalty in jail anyway.

I too felt two-face was rushed, I wanted them to end the movie with him appearing at the last second killing the joker right before the joker was going to kill batman or something then you have your villain for the next movie.

Also, I never felt the Joker ever received proper punishment for his crimes. At the end of the movie the bad guy is suppose to be seen getting killed or being put in jail. You didnt see Ledger's joker get put in jail or get killed. This may seem to be a small point but its huge when you see someone cause so much suffering but you dont get to see them receive any type of punishment.

Michael Keaton's Batman vs Christain Bale's Batman

Michael Keaton wins this easy. Batman has always been to me a late 30s guy with conservative tastes, driving a Rolls Royce and not a Lamborghini like late 20s Bale. Also Bale let Joker's intimidation get the best of him in this movie, I doubt Keaton's Batman would ever give in to anyone. Keaton was also far more stoic in Batman and Batman returns then Christain Bale. For example when the joker busted into Bale's party Bale bailed. However when the joker unveiled himself in front of Keaton and started shooting into the crowd everyone ducked except for Keaton and even a bullet crazyed his jacket's arm sleeve and he still didnt move. Michael Keaton is the better Batman

Jack Nicolson's Joker vs Heath Ledger's Joker

Not really a fair comparision because Jack Nicoloson's Joker script was obviously toned down to make him not that intersting so he wouldnt take that much attention away from Keaton's Batman. Nicolson did the best he could with what he had. Ledger's Joker was better but that has alot to do with the script and the Joker being the focus of the movie. Both jokers were psychos and I wouldnt want to be in the same room with either of them. Ledger's joker slams your head into a pencil Nicolson's throws a pen into your throat.

The main difference was Ledger's joker used knives which are more scarier then Nicolson's quick kill guns. If you take the knives away from Ledger's joker how scary is he then? As I said the script did a good job with the joker in Dark Knight.

Also, Nicolson's Joker henchman were far cooler then the lame clowns of Ledger's

New Batman Movie

As I said the villains in the second Keaton Batman movie were much more complex then in the first. Danny DeVito's penguin and Michelle Pheiffer's catwoman will be hard to top.

Well I typed this real quick if you have questions just ask I'm sure I didnt explain everything in proper detail or clearly
 
Is Bale really signed on for another Batman movie? Won't he be busy with the next two or three Terminator movies?

And BTW, the Nicholson comparisons really need to stop. In the movie, Jack Nicholson played Jack Nicholson in clown makeup. I think calling it a brilliant acting performance is just naive. Brilliant casting? That makes more sense.

I would also like The Riddler to be the next villain, because he ties in pretty well with the Joker. Perhaps even start the movie as the Riddler impersonating the Joker, like some people have suggested.

Oh and on Catwoman - wasn't there a scene where, after upgrading his armor, Bruce asked Alfred if it would "Stop a dog" and he replied "Well, it'll stop a cat!" Who knows if that was just a joke/reference, or foreshadowing.
 
I agree on the comparisons. Nicholson's Joker was a prankster, who acted nutty & crazy. Ledger's Joker though, was just an insane SOB, who didn't think twice & was much more ruthless.
 
EPIC movie. The best I've seen in a very long time... and probably one of my all-time favourites. Heath Ledger was completely awesome playing the Joker. I'm glad they're making a giant Arts theatre in Perth named after him 👍
 
Earth
One thing I dont get is why killing the Joker became such an evil thing to do in the movie. Lets face it, the Joker killed many people and tried to kill hundreds more in the movie. Then suddenly letting him die is a bad thing and you are evil like the joker if you kill him after all the people he killed himself?
Click to expand...
Thematically, The Dark Knight draws on The Killing Joke as one of its major sources of inspiration. In it, the Joker tries to prove that even the best of men can become like him because of "one really bad day", and that's exactly what he's trying to do here. If Batman were to kill the Joker, yes, the crisis would have ended and Gotham would have moved back towards order, but Batman would have been no better than the Joker. The fact that Batman is unwilling to kill is a major part of his character, and if he were to kill the Joker, his moral standpoint would have been destroyed and he would have become just another vigilante rather than what Gotham needed.
 
Do you race?
Thematically, The Dark Knight draws on The Killing Joke as one of its major sources of inspiration. In it, the Joker tries to prove that even the best of men can become like him because of "one really bad day", and that's exactly what he's trying to do here. If Batman were to kill the Joker, yes, the crisis would have ended and Gotham would have moved back towards order, but Batman would have been no better than the Joker. The fact that Batman is unwilling to kill is a major part of his character, and if he were to kill the Joker, his moral standpoint would have been destroyed and he would have become just another vigilante rather than what Gotham needed.
Click to expand...

Fine and good except the scene where Batman saves the joker from plummeting to his death. The line "I'm not going to kill you, but I don't have to save you" comes to mind.
 
Danoff
Fine and good except the scene where Batman saves the joker from plummeting to his death. The line "I'm not going to kill you, but I don't have to save you" comes to mind.
Click to expand...

I think that has more to do with the types of villain he was fighting, but you have a point.

===

RE: Bale in more Batman?

He is contractually obligated to do one more, but with the first Terminator already completed, my guess is that he'll find time to do both. At best, we won't see production on the third Batman start until 2010 at the earliest.

The wildcard in that situation?

Chris Nolan... He isn't signed on for the third, but at least in my opinion, he is the critical piece of the puzzle to round out this otherwise amazing trilogy.
 
I'm sure Nolan will sign on again.

Money-Print-C10055084.jpeg
 
Jefferey Tucker also wrote a great article on The Dark Knight.
Check it out here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/tucker/tucker101.html

The problem of evil is a big theme for a movie, and certainly for a movie based on a comic book, but Batman: The Dark Knight deals with it expertly, and with a message that offers profound support to the idea of human liberty.

...

Batman: The Dark Knight is one of the most spectacular and profound cinematic explorations of the problem of evil I've ever seen. It is not suitable for young children, but I recommend it very highly, not only for its libertarian theoretical structure but also for its moral power.
Click to expand...
 
Speaking of kids and The Dark Knight...

Is anyone else a bit put-off by those toys they have for the movie? You know, where they advertise for them like the kids would have seen it?

I don't like it. This is (like Kevin Smith said) an adult movie. A VERY Adult movie. I know if my kid was younger than 10 or 12, they wouldn't be seeing it.
 
Earth
Also, I never felt the Joker ever received proper punishment for his crimes. At the end of the movie the bad guy is suppose to be seen getting killed or being put in jail. You didnt see Ledger's joker get put in jail or get killed. This may seem to be a small point but its huge when you see someone cause so much suffering but you dont get to see them receive any type of punishment.
Click to expand...

i'm glad he didnt get "proper punishment." that is never "supposed" to happen. ever. and especially in this move. the last thing it needed was a hollywood ending with the good guys winning and the bad guys losing. the theme wouldnt have been nearly as effective if the joker had been killed. that sort of feel good, puppy-love resolution wouldnt have coincided with the dark tone at all. "evil" was winning throughout the movie and the sole victory for "good" is that this particular batman, whos character is against killing, stays true to his virtues but then is forced to sacrifice his place as a hero. batmans image is tarnished in the eyes of gotham residents and theyre left with a sense of dread. evil wins. finally.
 

Latest Posts

Back